I know a lot of the bdsm community was pissed about that series. Multiple scenes were considered abusive by the bdsm community simply because the male crossed the females boundaries repeatedly and the communication was shit between them.

The whole point is that the sub actually has the power in dom/sub relationships. They have hard boundaries and soft boundaries. They trust their dom to not cross hard boundaries. It absolutely would be abuse if they just trucked on through them like they didn't exist.

People always say this thing about how "the sub actually has the power" but I don't get why because literally all they're saying is that the dom can't just sexually assault the sub (that's all boundaries and safe words are, those are just ways of saying no, and when your partner says no you have to stop or else it's sexual assault, just like any other relationship.) Does the sub really "have the power" just because the dom has agreed not to sexually assault them? I don't really think of someone being "the one with the power" in a relationship simply because they're allowed to say no and their partner isn't allowed to just ignore it and sexually assault them. And the sub isn't allowed to sexually assault the dom either, so how is the sub more powerful in that situation? At best they have equal power because both are allowed to say no and neither can sexually assault the other.

People often say this and I always think this is a weird argument since that book is just porn, it's like if you were talking about live action porn and said, "you know someone should make an identical video where the woman is greasy and ugly and old, see if guys like it then."

This will be an unpopular comment but I have never really understood people who are like “Fifty Shades of Grey would have been sooo different if the main character was ugly and poor.”

Like...yeah. That’s kind of how plots work. It’s almost like James Bond would be a completely different movie if Daniel Craig was balding and overweight. It’s almost like Kate Upton wouldn’t have gotten the cover if she wasn’t young and fit. Shocking stuff here

I think for love stories (if 50SoG could be called that...), actually good ones have plots where the characters could be physically hideous and yet the story is still compelling. There are plenty of people in the BDSM community who wouldn’t even be cast as extras in a movie. But that reflects nothing about the nature of the kink, their personal relationships, etc. A good love story shouldn’t be different if one of the leads is poor, unattractive, etc., or even if the leads’ genders were switched.

For something like James Bond, however, I actually think his appearance is related to his plot/character. If you’re an international spy/assassin/general badass, especially a womanizer to boot, you have to be fit, charismatic, etc. The point of James Bond is to be an over-the-top representation of desire: he’s suave, sexy, mysterious, handsome; women want him, men want to be him. But he’s a character, and thus is next-to-impossible to replicate in real life, whereas love stories that involve toxic behavior CAN be (and often are) replicated.

But Christian Grey is like a 20-something millionaire. Doesn’t he also live in a penthouse and buy his “subs” like an Audi or something?

To clarify, poor writing and unhealthy relationship, yes. I simply don’t understand why when it comes to this movie, everyone’s like “Oooh if he was poor this wouldn’t be the same story!” I mean, saying most bdsm couples wouldn’t be cast in the movie is kind of silly to me, because again, you can say that about literally any movie.

I see what you're saying. I got the impression that people weren't so much saying 'it would be a different plot', though, and more like, if he weren't young/rich/handsome, the protagonist (and the readers) would be less likely to put up with his shit/abuse/creepiness, or more likely to realize he IS abusive/creepy. Our reaction to him would change, even if the basic story was the same. I dunno, I have not read the books, and only saw the first movie because RiffTrax did it haha

Yeah. I just think it’s weird because Reddit is the first group to admit that looks matter in life. One of the above comments says they should rewrite the book with the star as a Circle K employee. Like what...? Lol.

I think the argument is just “if the only thing keeping your character from seeming creepy is his rugged good looks, you should write him as ugly since that would expose how creepy he is.” Let’s be honest, the only real difference between Christian Grey and what we consider an “incel” is their attractiveness.

Looks matter in real life because you can get away with so much more. That doesn’t make it okay, especially when what you’re “getting away with” is emotional/physical abuse. Hence, a good love story is about character traits, not appearance. Yes, in the movies they’ll always be beautiful, but that shouldn’t be what makes the story compelling, if that makes sense.

I think the show You on Netflix is a really good example of this trope logically extended to what it really is. And what’s always so interesting to me about it is many of the people I’ve talked to have different opinions of when his behavior morphs from “romantic” to “creepy,” and it’s usually (perhaps coincidentally) related to how attractive they find Penn Badgley (the actor playing the male lead).

That was half of what hooked me on Showalter's hilarious Princes series: most of the guys look a little strange, but by the third book she's writing a character who is literally disfigured. Not "he'd be fine with a decent haircut", and not "he has a sexy scar"; not even "scars are my fetish". Straight disfigured. A few books later, a female lead is "plain but fascinating"; several books after that it's a guy with literal goat legs, and almost all of the established characters think he's gross. :)

But the story makes it work. As does the near-complete absence of toxic anything; the characters have issues, but the story is about two people saving each other, and generally helping each other sort through those issues. Mutual help.

It’s almost like James Bond would be a completely different movie if Daniel Craig was balding and overweight

This strikes me as an interesting premise - an agent who is utterly overlooked by his agency and the enemy because he's older, kinda fat, balding, and wears ugly thick-framed glasses. His double-0 counterparts get the Aston-Martins; he gets an ancient rusting Econoline, and he dresses up as an HVAC technician named Fred to infiltrate the SPECTRE compound and blow the place up. The Walther P.P.K is replaced with a Hi-Point C9.

Don't forget the rape. Because he totally rapes her. And it's not even a little bit vague.

The series of events is: He starts to get physical, she says "no," he says, "If you say no again, I'm going to gag you," and then he fucks her. This is all before she has signed his stupid contract or has agreed to be his sub.

And this is why I always say we have a lot of work to do. Rape culture and toxic relationship isn't only on men, unlike that I keep reading in some circles. Women spread that shit as well, 50SG is proof of that among many other work cited on this thread, written by women (and consumed gleefully by other women).

Yes internalized misogyny is a real problem, but I think the push to include men in both the conversation and in the load bearing of responsibility is to make sure they understand that this is not just a woman problem and it's not just our battle to fight.

I completely agree with that. It's a conversation that should include everyone.

What I meant is that I sometimes read women that consider that every women already knows all of this. And 50SG is the proof that we also need to work on women, as well, because far from all women received the message.

Before I was well versed I. I had a gf constantly insist on not having a safe word.
Note we both had unresolved trauma at the time we had not woken up to and it kinda complicated things. I totally see now why we eventually exploded for reasons outside this.

But she kept insisting “no safe word” and I eventually relented thinking ok, I won’t go too intense then (in my mind)

And did that work,

Yeah , no. Learned the hard way.

Last time I let some one kinda do all the learning and kinda instruct me on it. I kinda just was along for the ride at the time.

While they say healthy relationships do bdsm, at the same time I do find it interesting how all those with unresolved trauma in their back ground I’ve met often want to explore the master slave or daddy Dom/little dynamic looking for the kinda security they never got growing up.

When I look back and understand myself and those I’ve been with better,I totally see that happening. From the borderline adaptation girl who insisted no safe word, to wanting to feeling totally secure and kinda enmeshed.

Ever since stumbling upon a physical confirmatory experience that integrated my brain and body together and organized my Attatchment I think,

And learned a crap ton of emotional intelligence.

I really am surprised how often I see signs of trauma everywhere in people or on reddit stories or just in after reading “the body keeps the score” the signs of iron people.

It’s kinda crazy.

This has been a very eye opening and tough journey I’ve gone through as it has involved also waking up to how family actually is.

It’s been interesting, and almost like I wonder - “how many people actually have this perspective?” As I tech found I was in a bit of a kinda trauma social trap growing up, and am glad I’ve walked out. It’s just amazing to see how we don’t see this shit. I’m constantly floored.

Wow, I think it's the first time that I found a book that is much worse in the original version than in the Spanish translation. The translators improved it a lot... The plot was terrible and insane anyway. The only reason I read it was because it was a gift and I felt bad for not reading it. It was torture to finish it.

You're not missing anything at all by not reading the 50S books (although it is fun to laugh at the horrific writing).

Jamie Dornan did not fit the part at all and came off like a serial killer (which he portrayed exceedingly well in The Fall series). They could have definitely turned 50S into a Law and Order SVU episode.

I won‘t ever read or watch anything related to this but I also don‘t get people complaining about the story itself because it‘s fantasy.
Erotic fantasy.

There are erotic fetish stories out there that are worse.

Even in the most famous actual BDSM stories there are people literally held captive and there are body parts cut off.
Read Marquis de Sade.

In Sacher-Masoch‘s novel the slave gave his Dominatrix permission to kill him.

They are fantasies and not manuals.
There is a rape in it?
Well, there are rape fantasies in people and there is rape play therefore it exists.

I didn‘t read it and I don‘t want to but compared to many other real BDSM books this is very tame and I have no moral issues concerning it.

If it was in a sex shop in the BDSM section next to other real books about such topics then I guess most people would ignore it.

When I was a kid I made stories up that were dirtier than this.

I guess the issue is that the target audience weren‘t people that were already part of that scene but average girls that had no idea about it and girls that read other „chic books“ or romance novels or girls growing up and reading this after having finished Twilight.
And guys thinking this is what „all girls“ want now after its success.

I personally feel a bit like it appropriated BDSM culture.
Now you have preppy plain Jane over here who claims she is totally into BDSM now.
Wait, most vanillas don‘t even refer to it as BDSM now anymore.
You post a picture in bondage and people comment: „haha shades of grey!“
„Oh, you are totally shades of grey teeehee“.

Yeah, I was initially really skeptical but they essentially portray him as a NiceGuyTM who is consistently shown as manipulative and sociopathic and spirals downward. The trauma he suffered is also not really shown as a way to excuse his behaviour either - it’s presented in a neutral light.

It’s a difficult balance to strike because it is done as a first person narrative/monologuing but the cinematic elements are all there that support him becoming decreasingly unstable (For example: as the show progresses his internal monologue becomes more frantic, disoriented and winding).

I really liked that show, because of how well they portrayed the stalker. They really look into how he thinks, but they don't glorify it. Weirdly, my old roommate thought the main character was a great guy and couldn't understand why people think he's messed up.

...and when it is stable it's boring or lacking in some way and must be shaken up by some conflict. But then, these tropes exist because they sell, right? That means people must relate to them on some level.

...and that after you put up with all these things for him he's going to have an epiphany and fall in love with you and realize what a kind and wonderful person you are unlike in real life, where he just loses all respect for you and dumps you when you can't give him any more.

I’m going to mention the Twilight series here. I am a high school teacher who dealt with years of Fangirls who were in love with Edward. Who was abusive to Bella. He controlled her, stalked her, abandoned her in the woods instead of just breaking up with her in the living room, and was basically just a jerk. Girls now think it’s hot if a guy is literally obsessed with them, when in reality that type of single minded obsession is annoying and tiring at best, and dangerous at worst.

I read these books. I will never let my children read them. I really believe it normalized the abusive behavior to me, and I almost ended up being killed by my ex because I thought that sort of obsession/control was normal, and what love was.

I don’t blame you. You have a generation of girls coming of age who think that obsessive love is sexy- that being controlled is being loved. The part where Edward disables her car to prevent her from going to see her friend is outrageous.

Not to mention him watching her sleep, or the anxiety/excitement she feels before she sees him. I had to learn that that’s a very, very bad sign. I knew my now-boyfriend was a good one to be with because I didn’t feel that when we met, and I didn’t feel it before our first date. I haven’t felt it at all, because he’s normal.

You have boys coming of age now also who think that if a woman refuses a date she’s just being hard to get, so they become obsessive because they think that if they find out everything about her, she’ll be happy and date them. It’s like they think if they stalk her hard enough then she’ll come around. It’s insane.

Just last year I met a toxic couple, the girl was the toxic one, very jealous even tho the guy didn't give him any reason to, when she was mad at him she'd yell without caring if she was causing a scene but when she was okay she'd be all over him and everything would be rainbows, a friend of mine used the word "passionate" to describe their relationship and I'm like...what?

I've tried rewatching it a couple of times thinking maybe I'll see it from a different way or something but nope. They fight all. the.time. Then make up with some passionate kiss and it's all good. She cheats on her fiance and he just leads some poor widow on all under the guise that it's because he still loves Ally. Because that's alright then! The only redeeming parts were when they were old and he still visited

Derailing the topic is not permitted. Derailing includes but is not limited to: Changing the topic from OP's question; making someone else's response about yourself; asking unrelated follow-up questions; branching into unrelated topics; "What-about"-ism; arguments, slap-fighting, or debating; judging or rating other responses; meta comments about other responses; or responding to comments to tell us how your dick feels. No one cares.

But that's everything that came out post-#metoo. Used to like Bored to Death but man! The sexuality invariably involves deception and is always so predatory... it's impossible to enjoy now. One chararcter actually said "I hate women," - nobody commented on that. Fuuuuuck.

I completely agree. I just recently caught up on the last 3 seasons and they fight/argue in a negative way so rarely, that when they did, I felt just as awkward as the kids in the car. And bonus: when they apologized, they did it sincerely and at the same time. Such a great representation of a loving relationship!

Ugh, this. The woman is always a nagging shrew for having the tiniest, most easily attainable standards, whereas the husband is a lovable idiot who can do no wrong despite the fact that he's essentially the most difficult of the woman's four children.

What's crazy to me is how much viewers love this trope. It's been the model for so many TV shows it's tough to name them all (The Simpsons, Family Guy, Married with Children, All in the Family, Dinosaurs) and has been wildly popular for decades.

I think it's because there are still a lot of people in unhealthy marriages. They're cashing in on the viewers wanting to relate to the characters, instead of pointing out that the habits are unhealthy, which would turn a lot of people off. (Look at how many adults get offended when shown evidence that spanking children is provably harmful, and huff about how they turned out okay, as a more extreme example.)

Isn't Married With Children the opposite? Peggy is the incompetent one (doesn't know how to cook even basic stuff without burning it, won't do any housework but also has no job or income) and Al is the nagging husband always complaining and nagging about her just sitting on the couch being lazy and not doing anything.

But yeah I also don't get why viewers love this trope of unhealthy marriages where one is an incompetent fat jerk and the other is an annoying nag, I've never found it enjoyable.

I feel like low respect/appreciation high nagging/nitpicking/you can't do anything right relationship dynamics get a pass in real life, even past the point it should be recognized as abusive or unhealthy.

When Breaking Bad was airing, everyone was always bitching about Skyler and what a nag/bitch she was... Her husband was literally becoming an abusive, murdering druglord but somehow viewers decided SHE was the problem. I know that was the entire intention of the show (for viewers to keep seeing Walt as sympathetic even when he clearly wasn't anymore) but at the same time it was soooo frustrating.

I'm married for 15 years and I'm under 40. The reason that trope exists is because there's a kernel of truth in it.

I come home after my wife, 5:30 pm vs. 6:00 ish. As soon as I step through the door, she wants to fucking unload. I'm not exaggerating. Lawn guy came in, said you called him, what's wrong with the sprinkler? Amazon package came in, but it was missing X, is that going to come later cause I need to for Friday! Had a dental appointment with Child 1, she has a cavity, appointment with Child 2 next week for the eye doctor. Don't forget you have one two so you stop borrowing my contacts. How are we paying for those, is that HSA? I need to place and order like NOW because I can't run out, I have a thing on Friday. This weekend we got invited to Friend 1 backyard, no pressure, but we need to bring a dish ....

Her holding back on the updates is just as hard as me listening and reacting. Gotta meet in the middle.

Let me get my other foot in the fucking door! Let me get something to eat! Let me get something to drink! Let me take a shit! Go in the fucking kitchen and get me my big piece of chicken! (this is a Chris Rock joke).

Also, (and this is more annoying than specifically harmful) there is usually the complete 180 when it comes to her opinion of him. She goes from hating his guts to wanting to marry him in a short amount of time. Come on now!

Oh, does that not happen for you? I know when I'm yelling at a man I hate, I'm frequently overcome with an insatiable desire to jump his bones. There's just something about being berated and disrespected that really gets me going.

Derailing the topic is not permitted. Derailing includes but is not limited to: Changing the topic from OP's question; making someone else's response about yourself; asking unrelated follow-up questions; branching into unrelated topics; "What-about"-ism; arguments, slap-fighting, or debating; judging or rating other responses; meta comments about other responses; or responding to comments to tell us how your dick feels. No one cares.

This happened to me once! Well, kind of....
A girl stalked me for about a month until i asked her out on a date. At first the stalky thing was annoying, not creepy, then I found the persistence enthralling after a few weeks. She broke up with me a month later lol.

Totally agree. This is bad for men because it encourages creepy stalker behavior, but is also unhealthy for women because it encourages feigning disinterest in order to make men "work for it". I've had friends think that this is normal behavior, and play mind games with men who are interested in them, and then get disappointed if the man respects their boundaries and isn't creepily persistent. So it can be a loss for everyone involved.

Wow, never thought of it that way. Whenever I run into the "hard to get" game I peace out because fuck that. I think the real lesson to take away is that people who play games when you're chasing them will play games in your relationship, and at no point is that healthy or worth tolerating. By all means make me impress you, but that's not a game, that's the game.

Agreed. My daughter (and several other girls that I knew of) had problems with one particular boy at her school who had this problem.

She was initially friends with him as a part of a group and he quickly told everyone that he liked her. She said she wasn't interested and he just didn't stop.

Touching her arm, hair, forced hugs, following her between classes, staring in at her through the class windows. Creepy as hell, and luckily her drama teacher saw that particular one and walked herout of school away from him.

The school itself was kind of helpful, but it wasn't until I said I was considering contacting police that they (and he) took it seriously.

He really seemed to think that if he just kept hitting on her long enough, she'd give in.
The worst thing is that he moved on to girl after girl. I really hope I don't see his face on the news for murder or rape.

I listen to a radio show that features a “second date up date”. If you’re not familiar with it, it’s when people go on a date and one person ghosts the other. The person who was ghosted contacts the radio station to call the ghost....is that not weird af or what?

Also, the way most of these people meet is by the guy “romantically” (read:stalkerishly) pursues the woman.

Someday I hope to meet these other girls who have multiple uncontrollable orgasms every time they have mediocre sex with a guy for more than 30 seconds. I would personally like to congratulate them on being the luckiest women in the world.

This comment or post has been removed for containing gendered slurs that do not meet the gendered slurs guidelines for /r/AskWomen. If you edit to meet these guidelines, please let us know and your item can be reviewed for reinstatement.

Gendered slurs are not permitted unless they are part of a quote, being used in a discussion of the term itself, to refer to the actual body part referenced, or as part of a specific set of irreplaceable common terms. For more detail, review the linked guidelines.

If you have any questions about this moderation action, please message the moderators through the link on the sidebar or here. If you are messaging about your removed comment or post, please include a link to the removed content for review.

Omg I would watch that so hard though! I mostly write erotica for fun or share with a few friends or maybe a partner if I have one at the time and I legit loooove to throw some realism in. I name sex toys. There's lube (though I admit I sometimes make the applying it kinda sexy? Lol) people bump heads or fall off the bed or are close to coming and their partner says something stupid or starts laughing and kills it. Lol. I think I relish in breaking the conventions. And I mean I write hot stuff too (though a playful, silly dynamic tends to be part of the foreplay A LOT) but just it works so much better if in between the hor stuff you get something sort of real.

This is friggin amazing though. I could run with this. I can't believe I've never approached the lost or out of lube storyline! (But I also mostly write f/f so I suppose that penetration isn't so essential either?)

I think the reason movies don’t have long sex scenes like that is cause film makers think “why have that put in when you can just watch porn ur self.. as long as we get the point across it should be fine”.
It’s like plot and porn don’t exist. It’s either one or the other. That’s for movies tho. Books and manga can often have both

I always love the trend in teen tv and movies where you get to see the whole drama of procuring the condoms or the condom in the back pocket and naybe even this hilarious close up on opening the wrapper. But you're so right, it's only a teen interest thing.

But I mean of course because on the vast majority of tv and movies people also just met or knew each other casually and suddenly run into the on call room or the empty office and with no words ever spoken start fucking. In fact fuuuuck, that's what really friggin got me growing up. I was super confused on how seemingly common these sudden surprise hookups were and could never really fathom how that happens yet it's eveeeeerywhere.

The birth experience, especially the portrayal of the first time a mother holds/sees her child as being so magical and there being an immediate bond between them. I did not realize that it was normal to not immediately bond with the baby until a while after I gave birth and it contributed to my PPD. I'm sure there are a lot of mother's who had a similar experience.

Age limit for hiring, the "newborns" shown on tv are usually premature babies that have surpassed the age limit of 15 days yet are still small enough to pass as newborns. I believe an infant's working "shift" is 20 mins a day (though this doesn't include how long they have to be on set). Depending on the project some production companies contract expectant parents and vice versa in order to time their filming schedule and birth/age of an infant (usually several in order to account for any minor or major issues like health, appearance doesn't match, etc).

My mom always has liked to point out when it's obviously a doll being held andnnot a baby and honestly if you start looking you'll be able to notice it. You rarely see much of an actual infant on shows. You get a lot of selective swaddling where no actual head or face or hands are shown.

Also, as mentioned it isn't just infants. This is why for example the Olsen Twins got their start. They played a single character on Full House because being twins meant they could show more of this young child by splitting the acting time hetween the two. It's actually not uncommon for twins to he hired for roles like that still. If you happen to sit for the credits you'll see it quite a lot where they list two names (and same last name so obviously twins) for a single role.

I would assume the magic of babies is that you don't necessarily need twins at all (though I think plenty of twins get started that early. Makes sense) because hey babies all sorta look alike. I've heard it discussed that there may be like four babies on set at a time to get around those tiny time limits (could you imagine getting the perfect shot with a single infant in just twenty minutes?! Just knowing how often babies cry or have messy diapers and all!)

It's so interesting when you know all this because you'll definitely start noticing some of this. I'm sure it's also why on many soap operas for example (though I suppose on other shows too) they have the kid then you almost never see them. Just gets super noticeable on soap operas because two years later that baby is suddenly a teen. Lol.

Hollywood has the best healthcare, apparently. Like when someone gets shot in the chest with no indication that it even hurt, continueing to run, jump, roll, and fight for another hour after getting shot, losing almost no blood, and then being fully healed in the next scene (i.e., the next day) with only a sling on to remind us that it happened.

Getting shot in the chest with no indication that it even hurt, continueing to run, jump, roll, and fight for another hour after getting shot, losing almost no blood, and then being fully healed in the next scene (i.e., the next day) with only a sling on to remind us that it happened.

And they don't just bounce back from the physical trauma, they often don't have any lasting emotional or psychological trauma either.

Like... I fell face-first down the stairs once. No serious injuries beyond a bunch of bruises, but I was still nervous going down stairs for a while afterward. If a minor, totally accidental injury had that kind of effect on me, there's no way that I could be involved in a shootout and then jump right back into business as usual.

It's funny how births are so sequential and quick in media: dramatic water break -> painful contractions -> baby few minutes later! No wonder people are surprised we tell them to prepare for a long night in the hospital.

I understand that one, though, especially if the birth isn't a huge part of the plot line. If it is, then yeah it should be something like in Juno where they show her walking around in the hospital room frustrated and in pain (not saying that was the most realistic portrayal but it works as an example). But for something like Coneheads short is fine - water breaks, 30 seconds of a screaming hospital scene, a baby cries, dad faints, then you get a two minute montage and the child is a teenager. Ta-da!

On the flip side, I like to describe my daughter's birth as a hollywood birth. She's my first and I was expecting it to take the better part of a day. Nope, water broke and she was here within 3 hours. I got to hear the words "No epidural for you!" It was great fun.

On the flip side, I like to describe my daughter's birth as a hollywood birth. She's my first and I was expecting it to take the better part of a day. Nope, water broke and she was here within 3 hours. I got to hear the words "No epidural for you!" It was great fun.

If it makes you feel better I’m still kind of traumatized a year out. She was almost a month early, it was a complete surprise, and I got a literal crash course in natural birth. She didn’t come out super fast either; most of the time I was at the hospital before her birth I was pushing. The shakes I had afterward were so bad I couldn’t hold her. If I have another I am legit afraid I won’t make it to the hospital in time (I live 6 minutes away) and I don’t want a home birth. Also I was really looking forward to that epidural.

Now my SIL is a lucky one. She got to the hospital at 3am, she got her epi, and her kid was born at 9am in three sets of pushes.

My last birth was: painful contractions -> frantic car ride -> water breaking in the passenger seat -> climbing to the back seat to give birth on the side of the interstate. Sometimes a long labor is a good thing, lol

Two weeks postpartum I was talking to my mom and ended up completely breaking down because I felt like a 24 hour 7 day a week babysitter and she was like "ya.....it took me weeks to like you, it's normal" Jeeze! I wish I had been given a heads up.

When they handed me my daughter after my emergency c-section I almost puked on her head and I immedialy handed her back to the nurse lol. I was so sick afterwards that I wasn't able to hold her for a little over 12 hours. I think people forget how traumatic birth is on our bodies.

Lol my husband came to show me our son while I was still on the table getting stitched up but I could only see the side of his head and I’m like “yup that’s a baby”. I couldn’t have cared less about the baby while I was so traumatized.

My mom was in labour for36 hours, delivered vaginally, without any pain medication. She passed out immediately after delivery, and she ended up being the last person to "meet" me because she snoozed for so long

Omg yes. Birth doula here and have attended many births, including 2 of my own. Not only do films showcase the "magical moment" of holding your baby for the first time, but routinely scare the shit out of women for how loud, crazy and horrifying birth looks to be... it can actually be very peaceful and even fun experience- YES EVEN WITHOUT DRUGS. One of my clients was laughing and making jokes in between contractions up until pushing, without pain relief... is this the norm, nope. Is screaming, cursing & immediate, crazy painful contractions after a spontaneous break of the water bag, nope.

The way my friend described it was that suddenly there came a sound from her kind of like a cow and she could not do anything to stop it because her whole body was on autopilot at that point. But I guess that's a sound that's difficult to reproduce under normal circumstances.

I sounded like a ghost with each contraction. I had back labour with no drugs because I was still in triage. So I was trying to breathe through the contraction but also wanted to scream. Yup. A ghost came out of me.

The only way to get through it is to laugh. The best part was there was a woman making a similar noise earlier when I didn’t have much pain and my husband and I were laughing about it. Then when I was doing it he said “hun, you’re the one haunting triage now”.

I had my second a few days ago and this is exactly what happened to me. My labour went from 0-60 from active to delivery we’re talking 1hr 25 and I just remember hearing this sort of wailing sound and thinking please shut up before realising I had made it.

My pain was so intense that when they told me to think of something else when I was having contractions, the most I could do was stare at random objects. They told me to hold my husband’s hand and my hand muscles were so cramped from clenching my hands into fists that I couldn’t open them to hold his hand. I can’t possibly imagine making jokes through the worst of it, I honestly felt like I wasn’t going to survive it. But it wasn’t immediate- my water broke and 12 hours later with no contractions, they pumped me full of pitocin and I delivered within 3 hours.

On the flip side of things, my mother had a very traumatic life and suffered through many terrible things. I’m her oldest son. And she told me the moment she held me, she felt she had a reason to keep living. She said she wept tears for the first time in decades and since then all of her children have been her guiding sun and stars.

This was over forty years ago, but I remember being so disappointed my baby didn't look like the fat little Gerber baby. I almost didn't want anything to do with him. It cleared up fairly quickly but I still remember that extreme let down.

One of my dad’s military buddies who never had kids loves telling the story of meeting me. My mom brought me a couple weeks after birth to “meet” my dad’s flight crew and show me off. He tells it as “You’re mom’s just beaming, so proud of this life she made, showing you to me, and i’m standing there like ‘I CAN’T TELL HER IT DOESN’T EVEN LOOK LIKE A HUMAN’. You looked like a maraschino cherry, CaptHolt.”

Yup! I can’t explain it even now but when my second was born I couldn’t even make it thru the golden hour thing. I told my husband to take her - I just needed some space to myself without anyone touching me.

I would add to this in a different way as well, just that it's portrayed as horrifying and that mom will be in so much pain she yells and screams and that we're all on our backs with our legs splayed out. Not really the norm.

Also, the fact that not all babies cry immediately after coming out. My baby was a preemie, so they had to take him straight to the little baby examination station a few feet away from my bed. I didn't hear crying for what seemed like forever and I kept yelling "is he ok why isn't he crying" and had a full blown panic attack. Hyperventilating, chest pains, it was awful. I was so scared because he wasn't crying. The nurses told me later that's normal, it doesn't always mean something is wrong. I had no idea that they didn't come out literally screaming their head off.

​

And oh god the blood. I was not prepared for how much fluid there would be... everywhere. I still think back and am so confused how that much liquid was inside of me that was not amniotic fluid (my water broke at 35 weeks, and I can't imagine there was much left in there after the amount that came out before I even got to the hospital). I think my husband is still traumatized by the scene. It was truly a bloodbath.

The only time I'm ever okay with this trope is when it's about staying undercover/hiding. Don't know why that kind of surprise kiss kinda works for me, haha, maybe because there's usually actual death on the line or something. But just to stop talking or worrying, ugh, yeah, that's bs.

Yeah, I def understand what you mean! I sometimes feel a little “non-progressive” in a way that my subconscious seems to crave these stereotypical gender roles w/ the man being dominant & protecting me in a way. Sigh

It‘s the same for me and I guess the big difference are the two C: context and consent.

Some random guy kissing a random girl to „shut her up“ without her giving consent is a big no-no I guess. Unfortunately this is how many movies portray it.

It‘s undoubtly „sexy“ to some people including me but only as a fantasy or a work of fiction and that‘s what movies are: Fantasy and fiction.

Men should know it‘s not ok though and not think this is how to act.

It‘s fiction and not a manual.

Given the right context and the right person who knows that you don‘t mind that and if it‘s consensual then no problem.

And let‘s face it: Most of us wouldn‘t want a random guy we don‘t like and who isn‘t our type kiss us without consent „to protect us“ or „to shut us up“.
The random guy who isn‘t my type would get a big „eff off! I can protect myself!“

But if it‘s a hot crush then I‘d like to let go and I‘d let him do things to me.

If you have any questions about this moderation action, please message the moderators through the link on the sidebar or here. If you are messaging about your removed comment or post, please include a link to the removed content for review.

Apparently I tell my husband I’m going to lie to him before I do. I didn’t notice it until I started using Discord with him and I’d say things like “I’m going to lie to you and say yes” and this one guy always asks what’s the point of lying if I tell him I am so I just say marriage is all about honesty.

I get genuinely angry when there is cheating involved in movies, most of the time is not even necessary for the plot or the growth of the character.

Also it's usually portrayed as a brave thing to do or/and the most sensual thing ever, it's not sexy and makes me dislike the character instantly. It's not that hard not cheating, you don't want to be with someone anymore you leave them before the opportunity to cheat comes up.

This has always bothered me. For example the office is probably one of the best series ever made. But then you realize that Pam and Jim got together because they went behind Roys back and cheated. Even Dwight and Angela’s relationship was based on cheating.

Go back and rewatch season 2. It’s filled with inappropriate moments between them 2. In one scene Roy sees it and screams “you trying to cop a feel, Halpert?!”
No normal person in a relationship would be ok with their SO being that friendly with someone.
The show did a good job of making it out to be Pam leaving Roy for their own internal reasons and Jim being a better fit. But in the beginning it was more like a dood flirting with an engaged woman, who herself sent mixed signals.

I'm not sure if you're talking in regards to movies or actual open relationships, but in case it's the latter, I wanted to point out that what you're saying is incorrect.

In a true open relationship both parties are able to set boundaries they can both fulfill and are able to "mess around" with as many people as both are comfortable doing. For example, an ideal open relationship both parties have sat down and (in the same way BDSM relationships are set up) come to a consensus of the who, how often, how many, and so forth that comes with open relationships.

What you described is 100% not only still cheating, but manipulative, controlling, and all-around a totally toxic and abusive relationship.

Oh, I’m fully aware that actual open relationships are feasible and not at all what I described.

The reason I said what I dad was, if someone who wanted to cheat asked for an open relationship, I’m fairly certain they don’t actually want that. They want to be the one with freedom, but not anyone else.

It’s the difference between a cheater asking for an “open” relationship, and two mature adults participating in an actual open relationship.

Okay, sorry then. I wasn't sure, and wanted to at least clear the air just in case. I know a lot of people who demonize healthy open relationships because of that reasoning being used incorrectly so it irks me when I see/hear it.

I would hope that most people in a relationship would realize their SO just wants to cheat if they want an "open but not for you" type of relationship, or treated a supposed open relationship that way, but I know that isn't always the case. So hopefully what I wrote will at least help someone reading it.

Even if there's no explicit cheating, a lot of times the current partner in those kind of stories is a kind, stable, loving, basically decent person... but they're also boring, which of course means it's OK for the main character to leave them for tHe OnE, often in the shittiest way possible?!??!

Even if there's no explicit cheating, a lot of times the current partner in those kind of stories is a kind, stable, basically decent person... but they're so boring, so it's OK for the main character to leave them for tHe OnE, often in the shittiest way possible?!??!

Ugh cheating is everywhere now. I loved Big Little Lies but hated Madeline's cheating subplot. It wasn't in the book and added nothing to the story. It seems like cheating is just shoehorned into everything to try and be edgy

Yes that weirded me out too. Like, you've been cheating for years and years behind your SOs backs and then get upset when they don't want to see you/talk to you? But it's ok because the person you've been cheating with, you've known them for longer? The whole situation was bizarre, but that's tv I guess lol.

And how a character will break up with their SO and immediately bang the 2nd love interest and then go back to their SO. Like they think that’s some kinda loop hole bc they were technically on a break, so they can sleep with someone else guilt free.

I find this particularly unrealistic when the character cheating actually loves their partner. I genuinely can't even imagine cheating on my husband; I can't even think how that would work. The idea that someone could come along and make me throw everything I have away is insane to me. I know people who've become weirdly close to friends or work colleagues to the point where they were the thought crossed their mind, but suffered huge amounts of guilt over it and separated themselves from that person and refocused on their relationship with their partner. Of course people do cheat, but usually people who aren't in love with each other any more.

When the main character gets into the relationship of her dreams, then the guy f’s up or there’s some big fight/misunderstanding and they break up - BUT the minute the guy does some kind of “grand gesture” all is forgiven.

Where is the hesitation? The “I don’t know if I can trust that you won’t do this again” and “We need to take this slow until I know this is what we both want.” Realistically I feel like they’d spend a few days or weeks slowly getting back together, not solving it all within 5 minutes and getting engaged.

In the book she breaks up with him because of his awful family and their interference. It takes a few chapters into the second book and him making a huge effort before she decides to give him another chance, and if I recall correctly, she sets some solid boundaries.

I found it refreshing that their breakup wasn't over a misunderstanding or overhearing half a conversation, she had valid reasons to not want to join his family.

In the movie she very quickly decides to get back with him, I get it, it's a movie they only have so much time, but I had hoped to see that aspect reflected.

Yes! I haven’t read the book, but in the movie I originally thought “how refreshing that the woman finally has genuine reasons to break it off” but then it all got solved too quick without her talking to him about it all - and then suddenly they’re engaged.

It reminds me of that episode of Friends when Chandler and Monica have a huge fight and he proposes to her to make it better - she tells him they’re not ready to get engaged and need more time. Movies love using a proposal to “solve” the climactic fight the couple had.. at least Friends got it right.

thought “how refreshing that the woman finally has genuine reasons to break it off” but then it all got solved too quick without her talking to him about it all - and then suddenly they’re engaged.

I took the movie as the main reason she refused to marry him was because his family wouldn't approve of her and would cause a huge rift in the family. When he proposes a second time though, he has his mother's ring. That was a nod to earlier in the film when MIL says that the ring she had was a ring FIL had made for her because his mother wouldn't approve of her and therefore wouldn't pass down the ring. So current guy proposing with MIL's ring was a statement of her approval and therefore removing the primary issue.

I wonder if they did it because there were fears a sequel wouldn't be made and they wanted to show the actual ending just in case. Still sucks though because her leaving him was completely right and should have been portrayed.

Lol that is perfect, I'm gonna use that. Some close minded women at work told me once that gay people only result from abuse and I was too shellshocked to argue but this is the perfect comeback if it's ever brought up again. I am trying to slowly work on them to open their minds rather than freak out at them and burn the bridge.

Especially because it also sends this message that you are only a strong worthy survivor if after your trauma, you go on to accomplish a bunch of things and "overcome" it.

That's a lot of pressure for a person who just experienced something awful and may develop PTSD or depression. Like you never see these characters abandoning ambitions and not leaving their apartment for days, even though that's often what happens.

Why can't my drive to accomplish things and be a strong person be motivated by LITERALLY ANYTHING other than the actions of a man?

Duuuude there’s this Netflix series called The Keepers about a Catholic girls’ school sex abuse case, and one of the lines that got me BALLING was when a survivor (real life, it’s a documentary) who managed to become a lawyer late in life was like (paraphrasing) “What could I have accomplished if this didn’t happen? I don’t know. Those of us still alive - who haven’t drunk or drugged ourselves to death or just killed ourselves - our lives are smaller. Our dreams had to shrink to accommodate this trauma on our lives.” Like, I love a rising above it storyline, but holy shit rape has real impacts on how you live your life for many people, and those setbacks can alter your entire life trajectory. Like how many women out there could have been senators or CEOs or judges or whatever, but they couldn’t reach those ambitions while dealing with the fallout of abuse?

What's annoying is that it didn't happen in the books. Yes, sexual violence is threatened several times as she is a prisoner of war who is married off as a pawn a few times. But, she becomes strong after witnessing the death of her father and it's a slow burn as she's still very much a child through most of the books.

I think they just didn't want to write in the Jeyne Poole plot (who actually is disguised as Arya and married to Ramsay) and also had no actual ideas for scenes showing Sansa learning to play the game and wisening up. It was cheap in multiple ways and completely betrayed littlefinger's motivations.

I was just commenting to my husband that I liked how Arya was a strong female character who was not one of those tropes. Yes, she lost her family while she was young, but she was strong before that and her character seems to develop from that initial strength rather than what happened to her.

I agree with this but I'd take it a step further and point out that almost every female character experiences violence and to me that normalizes violence against women. What if we saw a day where violence against women wasn't normal and media would portray women as just living their lives? Right now it's so normal that it's an element in nearly every book and movie in existence. Even music. I got really frustrated recently because I was trying to find a single book or movie that didn't have violence against women. Couldn't really find any unless you count like science books and shit. WHY IS IT SO NORMAL AND NOBODY BATS AN EYE?!?! Violence is NOT normal.

As a guy, the obsession with sex lives in movies that are targeted at teens really screwed up my perception of what sex was supposed to be and how I was supposed to initiate and follow through on things like that.

It did the same for me as a female. My parents were super into the abstinence to the point where they fully demonized sex as one of the worst possible sins you could commit. Movies were my only exposure to what a relationship and sex were supposed to be like. It led to a whole slew of poor decisions and bad habits and really fucked with my understanding of what a healthy relationship actually looked like.

Riverdale is awful with hyper-sexualizing teens. Sure, most of their audience is teenagers and young adults, but the plot of the show is so bad that they just use attractive actors to cover it up. Archie is shirtless at least every episode, Betty was a 16 year old camgirl, Veronica is portrayed like a sex-crazed Latina and her and Archie's relationship is so much more sexual and superficial than Bughead, and Choni (and especially Toni) are extremely oversexualized but I guess that's ok because 'representation'.

Edit: Forgot to add Betty stripping in front of her boyfriend's father and his 50 year old biker friends

The older I get, the ickier I feel about shows obsessing over "sexy teenagers." Especially shows that are aimed at my demographic (30ish). If it's relevant to the story, teen sex is fine, but I really don't like when it's obviously meant to be titillating. We condemn people who have sex with teenagers as predators, while holding up teens as sex symbols in pop culture. Predators like that certainly have to take responsibility for their own actions, but our culture creates them on some level. It's weird and I wish it would stop.

I always find this in sitcoms. They order drinks, barely sip and then theyre leaving the bar / coffee shop. Theres a specific episode of How I Met Your Mother where they go and order burgers. They travel to at least 3 restaurants to find a perfect burger. In the meantime, they abandon 2 of these burgers and drinks each after just one bite. Just. Eat. The. Food. And try again tomorrow! This shit bugs me too much!

It’s sad because two of my good friends got broken up with recently, and they both had the same mindset. They both told their partners that they would change/do anything to keep the relationship. Really sad to see.

It's honestly so depressing how many women experience it, myself included. I'm always measuring myself up alongside other women, wondering why they get more romantic attention than me, are more successful etc.

I do agree with what you say. I feel like maybe there’s a handful of examples where you see a guy change to get the girl. Most of them tend to be the ‘bad boy’ type trying to get the wholesome pretty girl. I think there’s also been a couple of examples of the football meathead jock type that suddenly develops a personality all because he likes a smart girl. But again, very few & far between.

In all due respect, I partially disagree. On r/dating_advice people frequently suggest “improving yourself” as a way to get a relationship. While I agree that you don’t always need to change yourself to get into a relationship, if things aren’t working out for you you sometimes need to look in the mirror. I like to think I’ve improved myself and I think it helped

I agree partly, improving yourself is always a good idea, but women are constantly told to improve ourselves through advertising - it's relentless. We need to buy this makeup, these clothes, be slimmer, etc. Capitalism and the patriarchy go hand in hand. To see it reflected in media, like we aren't enough as we are and always need to improve, can really mess with your head - I know it has for me. I constantly feel like I'm not good enough as I am because I get no romantic attention and always wonder if I'd get more if I looked better, smiled more etc

Even when I am getting romantic attention I still have this very loud voice in my head telling me that I am not good enough. Something is always off, I often feel like I am not able to just exist without questioning my worth because I don't meet some arbitrary standard.

I can run for as long as I want and I’ll only get winded/slow down after I got away from my pursuers!! Also it’s super easy to just run away from someone chasing you and they’ll just give up as soon as you turn a corner!

Very specific to my situation but as an ace/aro person I'm exhausted by the constant "if you're not in a relationship then you've failed at life and if you don't want a relationship then you're broken and you just need to wait for the Right Man to come along and sweep you off your feet!"

Can I just say that this was one of the things that made me really happy about captain marvel? Not only does she not have any love interest in the film, neither does anyone else, and I didn't miss the romance at all, the story was still great. Just like Thor Ragnarok, btw, where the two female roles are not just reduced to someone's love interest either.

And this is why I love Lightning from the FFXIII trilogy. She doesn't have a canon love interest, she's far too busy kicking ass and rescuing her sister (and later on basically being an actual deity) for that. My first ever ace/aro headcanon.

I’m not ace/aro but I do believe along the same lines that movies are all sending a message like “ROMANCE IS ULTIMATE FULFILLMENT.” But it’s really not. Romance is a special relationship with a person (or with people if that’s your thing). A person is going to satisfy your whole life? That’s wayyyyy to much pressure to put on someone.

Often I watch movies where there's a man and a woman who for whatever reason cross paths and end up working together or mentoring the other, etc. It always seems like there's enough substance in the film for them to simply have a close friendship, but nooooo they have to fall into bed together. This was my thought recently when watching A Star is Born, arguably the movie would've been less dramatic if they were just friends, but still...

Exactly - I realise I have dissonance from it because I don't require sex and therefore do not understand the craving for it, but this trope that unless you're bonking you're basically worthless and to be pitied is just...awful. Using 'virgin' as an insult like, you don't have a special name for someone who's never had a pizza before do you? Why is it different for sex? I don't get it.

I'm am in a relationship and I hate this. Loath. I've been in single periods and completely happy and fulfilled and this made me feel such irritation at society telling me how I should feel and value different things. Mind your own business. Where are the stories about people who were like me? Where are the stories for people like you? That's what we need.

(also heavy, reckless drug abuse or drinking. I'm not against either in moderation, but it's a dangerous trope where they show young women just using whatever someone offers them in huge amounts and having these fantastic dancing/ YOLO evening.

Viewing possessiveness and jealousy as indication of intense love. K-drama and their portrayal of romance did fuck my perspective of love for a while. It took quite a bit of unlearning to understand the toxic masculinity and how one should and should not express love.

I used to fantasize about that type of relationship when I was younger because of how often I saw it. Then I had a relationship where the guy was super possessive and it made me so fucking uncomfortable. I HATED how he coddled me or when he would make a point to prove I was "his". That was quite possibly the shortest relationship I've ever had, and thank God it didn't last longer.

I am so glad you were able to see the toxicity and had the strength to leave the relationship! I feel like people who grow watching this can fantasize about “his” girl and stuff and stay longer in a relationship than they should

Personal Taste for me did the best, theres a lot of kdramas who are just cliche but not those things, i try to keep away of those, though, theres always a second lead who acts like that. I still dislike Boys Over Flowers, it was so trash.

A lot of bad law enforcement behavior is normalized in movies/TV. We all enjoy cheering for the good guy cop bending or breaking the rules because he's just so intent on getting the bad guy! But this trope is so common I can't help but wonder if it's contributing to peoples' unwillingness to hold real police more accountable. We all just have this stereotype in our minds of police putting their lives on the line to enforce true justice, but that's not always the truth.

"copaganda" is a term I've seen applied to it. Normalising the guy who's a "loose canon who plays by his own rules, but god damn it he gets results".

Also similarly our civil rights and liberties are usually portrayed as an obstacle to getting the bad guy. Eg: needing warrants for searches, having to let them speak to a lawyer, not being able to detain without charge indefinitely etc.

Law and Order is so guilty of that. Anyone who asks for a lawyer is clearly guilty. Requiring a subpoena/warrant is a jerk move, and we'll threaten your business if you make us get one ("sure we can come back with a warrant, but I'm sure all of your rich clients at this spa will be unhappy when we storm in during peak business hours and tear the place up. Orrrrr you could just give us the records now."), the DA is clearly bad at her job if she can't make your illegally obtained evidence stand up in court. It's ridiculous.

Along with that, I despise their portrayal of defense attorneys being assholes. I get that it's better drama, but I feel really strongly that even the worst criminals deserve a vigorous defense to safeguard our own access to a defense. Portraying defense lawyers as weaselly, snide fucksticks leads directly to people thinking "That's a right that defendants don't deserve."

I started watching reruns on tv sometime last year after never seeing the show before and I HATE Stabler for always assuming guilt in every single suspect right off the bat. I watched a couple of episodes on a rainy day and I just couldn’t take it! He used physical force on almost every suspect, and at the end of the episode, none of them were the bad guy. No repercussions for the glorious Stabler though!

And Blue Bloods . I hated the "copaganda" in it so much I deleted the timer after the season one finale. All those scenes (in every episode, I swear) where that one detective would grab suspects and shove them against the wall, hard-but it's OK, because the audience saw the Bad Guy commit the crime. Just ugh.

Ugh it grosses me out when they just luxuriate in bed and I'm thinking, you're gonna have to change those sheets when you're done cuz you have to be leaking everywhere (if they didn't use a condom). Even with a condom, sex is messy. Plus, UTI's are a thing and they are unpleasant.

Or when they just put their clothes back on and go about their day without so much as washing their hands. This is especially unrealistic if the woman is wearing light clothing and then sits down without any sign of a wet patch.

I used to (and still kinda do) get really angry about the Taylor Swift "You Belong With Me" song.
It's being sung by the homely nerdy girl, but if you listen to it... the cheerleader sounds like a catch, like:

"She's cheer captain and I'm on the bleachers"
In other words, the cheerleader is an accomplished athlete and leader, and the singer needs to get off her ass and find a hobby.

I don't know, it bugs me so much. They're both the worst caricatures of their respective tropes.

I always felt the same way when I was a teenager and heard that song, even though I would have had more in common with the not cheerleader girl. She wears high heels I wear sneakers, she's upset with you about something you said but I would have thought was funny, I'm better for you than her in every way... Girly girls are secretly worse than us real girls.

It's just the NiceGuy (TM) shit coming from a girl, this time. Taylor Swift has said in interviews that she's moved away from songs like that because as she's gotten older too and matured, she has a very different perspective on not just relationships with men but feminism and supporting other women. Good for her.

This hilarious, just yesterday I was thinking about what the theme songs for niceguys and nicegirls would be. The Taylor swift song definitely for nicegirls and Tal Bachmann's "shes so high" for niceguys

-telling young girls that if a boy is mean to them or hurting them it means he likes them
-men harassing women everywhere/following them until they agree a date
-jealousy as a sign of love
-your whole life changes if you meet the right partner

I can’t remember the last time I saw a partially or totally uncovered woman’s body in a movie that wasn’t either young, thin, and the product of a personal trainer and carefully prescribed diet, or a “body-positive” marketing technique or fat joke. Do some real women hover around underweight BMI and have no visible fat? Sure. But far more real women have sagging stomach skin, C-section scars, cellulite, and stretch marks. I wish we could see female movie characters not necessarily who are obese or overweight, but who just have average, normal, “flawed” bodies just hanging out by the pool or something and have it be without remark and not some kind of “look at how progressive we are!” ploy.

It's actually far worse than you think because not even the girls being filmed look like the girls in the final movie.

I live/work in LA. Not only is literally every square inch of showing skin airbrushed with thick make up and contoured BUT they have a motion graphics person then go in and alter the body. I have a good friend who does this for a living and I actually watched him shave "fat" off of Ariana Grande's thighs for one of her music videos. Absolutely everything you see in celebrities and movies is fake, fake, fake. Actors are incredibly average looking. They just have a team of 35 people working to make them look spectacular. We would look that good too, trust me. I literally dress celebs for a living. They aren't that great looking. It's so dishonest and damaging to men and women.

It’s always way easier to be beautiful when you have the time and money for a personal trainer, nutritionist, esthetician, stylist, and cosmetic surgeon. Money can take a person from average looking to beautiful.

Absolutely. There is this myth that celebs were perfect looking to begin with. Not true. And even with all of their plastic surgery and facials; seeing them without their 2 spanks, butt pads, 6 pounds of airbrushed make up, fake hair and nails and lashes, they are still quite average looking. They are just human after all.

Yup, they do hair flocking for men. It's all smoke and mirrors my friend. I have no idea why any of us give 2 cents about celebrities. We don't know anything about them, their persona is just marketing. They are nothing they present and we should all stop paying attention to them.

I remember growing up that in a lot of family movies with a romance subplot, the couple would always have a baby or kids in the very last scene of the movie. Growing up, there was a lot of girls that didn't want to get married because they related it to settling down and having kids. I just hated how kids = good ending, not the fact that the couple was together in the first place.

I love that show, but having April have kids, when she was vehemently childfree for the entire rest of the series, was SUCH a bad move. It seems like so many otherwise great TV shows undo years of character development in pursuit of the perfect ending. They just ruin everything instead of honoring the characters.

I still get mad when I think about this. Andy and April are not characters who are meant to be parents. They're lovable idiots who do shit like buying a nearly condemned house with no bedrooms and 6 bathrooms, or eating out of frisbees because they have no plates. April didn't want kids, ugh!

Then there are the movies where the main female character makes a point of saying she doesn't want kids, and the ending shows her with a bunch of kids anyway! (Spoilers for popular film franchise) Hunger Games, I'm looking at you. Though to be fair to the filmmakers, the books did it first.

I haven't seen the last of those movies but in the ending in the books I remember them saying despite everything she had, she still wasn't really happy. She had major PTSD and struggled hard.. so at least in that sense, it wasn't kids = happy ending.

Yeah the book made it seem like sure, she did the happy ending things she was supposed to, but she wasn't happy. She called her kids "the boy" and "the girl", clearly still thinking in the Hunger Games mindset.

I think some people interpreted it as a happy ending, but I thought it was more of a bittersweet one. She had found ways of coping, and that was the best she could hope for after everything that happened. I'm not sure every reader picked up on that, however. That being said, I'm only talking about the annoying trope in media where all female characters have to have kids in the end, not the final chapter as a whole.

It’s been forever since I’ve read / seen it, so I may be completely wrong but in that particular example, wasn’t her reasoning for not having kids that she didn’t want to subject them to the Games? So once the Games were not a part of society anymore, she may have changed her mind on that. Agree it’s gross when they do that in movies though. Even grosser in real life. I have a friend who never ever wanted kids and her husband severely emotionally manipulated her into it. She loves her son but marriage is hanging by a thread and she resents him like crazy for it.

She did say that was part of it, but I don't think it was the only reason. I don't have the book on hand, but what I remember from the final chapter was, she still didn't want kids and gave in after years of Peeta asking for them. She learned to love the kids but was still upset that one day she would have to tell them about her role in the Hunger Games.

In the end, I would like to see a female character who doesn't want kids and sticks with it. Not any of this "changes her mind" stuff that comes up in any movie where a woman says she doesn't want kids. Between the baby-crazy women and the ones who change their mind, there are very few women in media who actually don't want kids and don't have them.

My issue with that ending was that it felt like we missed out on a ton of character development happened in between the end of the story and that scene. 100% from what we know about Katniss in the books, I can see her coming to that ending eventually. She's very motherly, she's always taking care of people, she's been a mother her entire life to a little sister and even other people living in her District, hunting for them, taking care of them, working to help injured people. She has a lot of trauma, and like anyone, that interferes with her conceptualization of a future for herself. I think that the transition to that last chapter was crappy writing choices. But I can 100% see that ending happening for that character... I just have to fill in the blanks myself about how she got there.

I get where you're coming from, but I don't know if The Hunger Games is the best example.

Katniss spent her whole life living in anxiety that she might lose children to the Games. It was a huge part of her relationship with both her sister and Rue, and it was a really crippling and terrifying part of her life. It didn't bring her any happiness to think of not having children --- just panic at the thought of having them.

So, it kind of makes sense to have her change her mind at the end as a sign that she finally felt safe, for the first time in the whole series. Having kids and then losing them was the thing she was most afraid of in the world, so it makes sense to use it as the sign that her fears had ended.

Of course, it's a gesture that diminishes because so many other, lazier books have used similar tropes, but I think that particular book did a fairly good job.

It took five, ten, fifteen years for me to agree. But Peeta wanted them so badly. When I first felt her stirring inside of me, I was consumed with a terror that felt as old as life itself. Only the joy of holding her in my arms could tame it. Carrying him was a little easier, but not much.

To me that sounds more like she did it because her partner kept asking her to, not because she truly wanted them. I'm not sure she finally felt safe, either. She has just found a way to cope with the trauma.

I’ll tell them how I survive it. I’ll tell them that on bad mornings, it feels impossible to take pleasure in anything because I’m afraid it could be taken away. That’s when I make a list in my head of every act of goodness I’ve seen someone do. It’s like a game. Repetitive. Even a little tedious after more than twenty years.

To me it's rare to see a YA protagonist state a desire to not have children, so to have her change her mind at the pushing of her partner was a disappointment for me. I don't think having children was necessary for her to gain closure at the end of the book. It just undid the characterization that came before it. Having children shouldn't be the default for women, and we need some sort of huge excuse to justify choosing not to have them.

The impression I got was she didn't want kids through most of the books because she didn't want them to grow up in such a horrible world. She had kids later because she had hope for the future. That girl from the water district with completely uncontrolled PTSD who had the other water champion's baby though... How was him dying and her being stuck with the kid a happy ending?

It says in the final chapter she didn't want kids afterward either and gave in after years of Peeta asking for them. So presumably that was not the only reason, and it's not clear she would have had them of her own accord.

I don't see why a female character has to have some sort of outsize excuse to not want kids, anyway. I just want to see more media where women who don't want kids don't have them.

Yeah, but at least Monica talked about wanting children the whole series, instead of a childfree character just magically wanting kids after seasons of insisting that they didn't. The Parks and Rec example mentioned above.

Yeah but it is OK that Monica always wanted that life. There is nothing wrong with having kids and moving to the suburbs. I would have been upset if Phoebe's story ended in the burbs with a new set of twins, or even if Rachel had deiced not to be a hip city Mom after all. I like how friends ended with 1 suburban family, 1 urban family, and 1 DINK (Dual income, no kids) family.

Well TBF for them that was a happy ending, Monica had been on about wanting to be a mum the entire show and it was THE reason she broke up with Richard. I dislike that kids = happy ending generally, but in their case it was fitting.

Bojack Horseman is crack for me. The whole recurring “Bojack we literally all know what your problem is, here’s a step by step list to fix yourself” and Bojack just being like “that’s hard, i’ma get drunk and burn bridges instead” in depressedme.vid

Plus it's usually very stereotyped. Middle aged woman, wearing long-sleeved sweaters, with unkempt hair, and barely leaves her house. There are plenty of high-functioning people with mental illness. Business men, teachers, bus drivers, literally anyone. But we always fall on the same old trope.

That and I'm so sick of seeing the fat, out of shape, ordinary guy with the smoking hot wife on television shows. Seriously guys, if you're a 4 there's a 99.9% chance you're not going to get a 10. You're not even going to get a 6. Women put work into looking that good. They expect the same out of you. That or a personality that keeps them laughing 24/7 or in some cases a bank account that will keep them looking that way for the rest of their lives.

In real life it's not something I use. It was a tool to get the point across. I work with 99% men and the number of guys that I work with (who are really great guys but take zero care of themselves) that pass up great women who actually like them because they're holding out for the "full package" is astounding. By full package they mean hot. I keep telling them that they may want to check what's lacking in their package. Had one super sweet guy on my crew get romance scammed by someone using a pic of a porn star. It broke my heart to tell him look in the mirror, now look at that picture, what about this makes sense to you? This was after he had sent "her" over 500 dollars and I did a reverse picture search for him and proved it was a scam. Sometimes people need a wakeup call to quit passing up on realities that are perfect for them because their holding out for a dream that's never going to happen.

I'm not going to lie, I cried the entire time that I was telling him. These guys are my family. I spend more time with them at work than I spend with my actual family. I would do anything I can to protect them from getting hurt and it broke my heart to hurt him even if it was the right thing to do.

I updated one of my male friends tinder accounts. He is a bellow average looking guy and he puts fairly minimal effort into his appearance. I was shocked at how vain and horrible he was at picking girls. He would not even give them a chance, because their nose or forehead was too big. You should be physically attracted to someone, but he took it waaay too far. These girls looked really sweet and good too. He expects to get with a perfect looking, smart, funny girl, while not putting any effort in improving his own shortcomings.

That there always has to be an attractive woman around to chase, where everyone knows she’s attractive but that one guy “wins” her. It’s old, it’s cheap, it’s overdone, it’s inaccurate, it objectifies women. Also having multiple men come after you in competition isn’t romantic, fun, or sexy, it’s confusing and slightly terrifying.

I just want to mention that guys are as tired of these tropes as women. And if you want a movie that subverts this, I recommend Guardians of The Galaxy. They actually wrote the characters as real characters.

One thing I always notice is how quick men online are to cry "misandry!" when there is female-on-male violence in a film, meanwhile male-on-female violence is so pervasive no one blinks an eye at it. You rarely hear it called misogyny.

Think of a scene where Michael Cera (because my references are old and outdated) is trying to pick up his phone off the floor of a moving bus when suddenly the driver hits the brakes. He is tossed off balance to the floor but manages to throw up his arms catch himself... by putting both hands on an attractive woman's butt. He tried to stammer an apology but the camera shows the woman winding up to punch him in the face for being a creep. The next scene is him at home with a frozen bag of peas held against his swollen black eye.

Now think of the same exact scene, except instead of a beautiful woman it's an attractive man, and he's punching Sophie Turner in the face.The next cut is her holding a frozen bag of peas against her swollen black eye.

In the right movie, with the right quippy one-liner in the ice pack shot Cera getting punched would get a lot of laughs because we're used to a woman hurting a man being shown in a comedic way. However, the audience would most likely be uncomfortable with Turner being punched in the same circumstances if it was portrayed as a comedic gag.

That said, Sophie has had much worse done to her character in Game of Thrones and the reaction from a lot of people was "oooohhh how dramatic." Partialy because she's an amazing actor, but also because we as an audience have decided female on male violence is ok in comedies, male on female violence is ok in dramas.

Hollywood loves its tropes and unfortunately, both genders have sexist things that audiences are fine with seeing where it would be jarring if seen done to the opposite gender.

Think of a scene where Michael Cera (because my references are old and outdated) is trying to pick up his phone off the floor of a moving bus when suddenly the driver hits the breaks. He is tossed off balance to the floor but manages to throw up his arms catch himself... by putting both hands on an attractive woman's butt. He tried to stammer an apology but the camera shows the woman winding up to punch him in the face for being a creep. The next scene is him at home with a frozen bag of peas held against his swollen black eye.

I nope right out of any show that perpetuates this. Also not interested in reading books with this formula. As a child of an abusive father, I don't need reminders of my trauma and what could have happened to my family.

Sorry, can’t remember... more than 10 years ago. The article stated that one particular show (CSIS, SVU, something like that) had a female victim rate of close to 100%. I was so shocked I started watching reruns for a week and found out they were dead on. Stopped watching those shows after that because it was too disturbing. Felt like primetime just wanted me dead.

If you have any questions about this moderation action, please message the moderators through the link on the sidebar or here. If you are messaging about your removed comment or post, please include a link to the removed content for review.

Unhealthy relationships, "no means yes," objectification and sexualization of women, and that 50 Shades crap making sexualized violence against women the kind of mainstream thing you can find in your local movie theater.

1) An idea called women in refrigerators, where women die (or are raped or depowered in some other way) as fuel for men to go on whatever revenge quest.

It happened in infinity war with Gamora and in endgame with Black Widow, which I find disappointing in an otherwise entertaining movie.

2) women being love interests, which is also a characteristic in Marvel movies. Just try thinking up a woman who isn’t a wife, a mother, a girlfriend, or a love interest. Other than Captain Marvel, who’s a really recent addition, they don’t exist. This may not be true for every movie, but obviously Marvel is popular, a lot of people watch it, including kids, who will see all the women in these roles, even Black Widow who is part of the team, being some sort of love interest. In one of the avengers movies, she calls herself a monster for being sterile. It’s ridiculous.

3) the “yay women!” Moment in movies, where there’s a few minutes dedicated to just women being awesome. Which also happened in Endgame. We don’t need one single scene dedicated to us, we wanted to be treated as normal characters, not characters who pop up for five minutes to look awesome and then don’t appear for the entire rest of the movie so the writers can slap a feminism sticker on it and call it quits.

4) I don’t understand why body armed has to contour around the chest to accentuate breasts. Nor do I understand why when women dress in body armor, their legs are always bare. There’s no point other than to show them off for the legs to be bare, and men don’t have this issue.

5) does a show with a female main character and a guy friend who does NOT become her boyfriend, without him being gay, exist?

6) do women without huge breasts in movies and shows exist? There’s nothing wrong with breasts, I just personally don’t like how every adult women is portrayed as having them which is not true at all.

7) I’m still salty with Marvel.

8) women being massively outnumbered in a team in an action movie. Either she’s with a partner, in which case you KNOW they’re going to be a couple, or she’s the only woman in a team of mostly men.

9) in an action movie about a woman, she’s sometimes physically overpowered. You don’t have to overpower a woman, just make her equal.

6) Maybe I just haven't seen enough television or movies, but I've noticed that I almost never see a topless woman on screen with breasts about the same size as mine outside of porn. I can find my size in a regular store, so I don't consider my breasts to be abnormally large. By almost never, I mean I've seen it once. Seems to me that larger breasts automatically equal hard core porn.

Mantis is a love interest. She’s a love interest of Drax. No, they aren’t a couple and he calls her ugly, but it’s clear their banter is so the audience can ship them. Like when they said “take ass and kick names” together while standing next to each other. Not an indication of a couple in real life, but in movie logic, it’s a clear indication. They get plenty of couple’s banter scenes and he talks about her beauty (or lack of).

And speaking of that, it’s supposed to be a funny scene but if you think about it, it’s not funny at all. All their scenes together (in the second movie), like him laughing at her being snapped at by Rocket are quite degrading to women, being seen as something funny. Because she keeps trying to get him to like her and all he does is be mean in his oafish way so it’s seen as humorous. She doesn’t seem bothered by his blatant words, portrayed as innocence.

That’s what I mean by love interest by the way — the hinting at a coupling. Like black widow flirting with hulk in one of the older avenger’s movies. The instant any hint happens, they’re a couple because that’s how audiences think.

Sorry, it’s my bad, I didn’t make it clear what I was referring to as love interests.

Valkyrie doesn’t have a love interest. She had (I think?) a friend who died. I don’t quite remember. That’s fair, though she’s pretty much shoved to the side in both Thor solo movies and the avengers movies.

Nebula is evil until some point in end game (and some point in the second movie) so I don’t count her — an evil person with a love interest is probably not a good idea plot-wise. But do note that she was basically abused. That’s her backstory — abuse from her “father”. So instead of being a love interest, she had a backstory of being depowered.

Also, it must be considered that these movies are based on the comics, which are far, far more misogynistic. Valkyrie had a love interest in the comics. As did Captain Marvel. Comics are an entire different breed.

What makes me furious (on a slightly unrelated note) is that black widow was the person who, in endgame, pulled the team back together, starting the entire process of bringing half the population back, and she didn’t even get a funeral. Her death being downplayed was blatantly obvious. If anything, that’s what I disliked the most.

It’s infuriating because avengers movies are popular — this is what everyone watches, these movies influence our culture. Kids watch these movies. No matter how subtle, it does influence our culture, in the culmination of movie scenes like it and in the fact that avengers is popular and a lot of people watch it.

At least Black widow had choice in how she went out. But honestly I kinda wish we had gotten that Black widow solo movie before endgame. They always kinda brought up how felt like she needed to make up for her sketchy past but they never really went that deep into it other than Age of Ultron and even then they framed it as her being a victim rather than focusing on whatever vauge bad actions she feels so guilty about. Would have given all her actions in endgame a lot more depth.

She ended up sacrificing herself for her family, which is again, the idea of women in refrigerators: Women sacrifice themselves for men. Her death itself is honorable and selfless, it’s the idea of her sacrificing herself for men, along with other ideas about women portrayed in the movie, that’s wrong. The act itself wasn’t wrong.

As much as I hate the women in refrigerators trope I disagree with number 1. Gamora and BWs deaths didn’t motivate the actions of men, they were casualties in a war. The only thing any of their deaths motivated was Quills freak out. The avengers got all the stones and carried on with their already set mission after they learned BW died. The literal same plot line would have happened had Clint sacrificed himself.

Movies normalize that healthy women bodyshame or fatshame themselves and are obsessed with losing weight.

There are often characters saying they are on a diet or saying they are excluding food or that they shouldn‘t eat sweets etc although they are obviously healthy or normal or in most cases even already very skinny,

For instance a skinny bride watching herself in her dress and she‘s stunning and she goes:
„No more ice-cream for me!“
Why? Not only is she very skinny and model-like and the dress isn‘t too tight or anything...even if this wasn‘t the case...how would excluding a food make any sense?
It normalizes hating your body and taking extreme measures.

Or whenever a normal or healthy girl eats something „unhealthy“ or a sweet it somehow needs to be adressed by adding that she actually didn‘t want to eat it or that she needs to eat healthier or it‘s portrayed as a binge after being depressed/heartbroken.

As if eating disordered or almost eating disordered behaviour and body image issues are normal in women like a character trait that most women just happen to have instead of it being a worrying problem.

The way food is portrayed is so fucking weird. Like it's a "cute" character quark if a skinny girl loves food but if we showed an average woman(or god forbid a fat woman) eating pizza it would be "setting a bad example" and "glorifying obesity".

Yes, most people recognize they could lead a healthier lifestyle. But the crazy diets and the constant guilt isn't healthy. The idea that it's some kind of moral failing if you eat something 'bad' or gain weight. We really need to recontextualize the way we think about food.

Love triangles (looking at you twilight) and how women always tend to like it when a man comes to get them from the airport after hurting them super bad. Like a bouquet of cheap flowers is going to save your relationship that has been damaged by cheating and killing your son.

Also how they tend to think that laying next to each other after sex is normal. I'm sorry I'm cuddling after sex or peeing. Not laying there staring at the ceiling.

Outside the context of relationships, I think movies generally tend to romanticize the idea that everything will work out in your favor/you'll get everything you ever wanted/achieve your wildest dreams no matter how unrealistic they are. Too many movies are about how the protagonist has a specific goal in mind (get married, have a dream, career, fame, etc), and everything from their fictional environment to the people in their lives happens to perfectly support that dream. In reality dreams don't just come true because of right time and place, you have to work for them and sometimes even when you work for them, things don't always turn out how you want them. Inspirational movies are great and all, but I think it can give people the wrong idea that everyone has the chance to succeed equally if they just believe. (not that this isn't true, just that it takes a lot more work and effort to succeed than how movies seem to show it).

Wonder Woman had a lot of flaws, but I was SO IN LOVE with the scene where Steve Trevor tried to grab Diana's arm and pull her away from a conversation, but he COULDN'T, because she was stronger than he was, so he had to let her keep talking.

I hadn't realized how much I was desperate for a scene like that until I saw it.

If he already has a girlfriend/he starts dating someone who is not the main character, she is automatically nothing more than a problem and her feelings don’t matter. She deserves to be sabotaged and have her heart broken because she’s not you/she’s not your best friend/you don’t know her personally.

Pulling out a knife/sharp object after someone is stabbed. The object is stopping the blood flow. The only people who should be pulling it out are medical professionals at a hospital not your random Joe out in the middle of nowhere.

And then after they pull out a 5 inch object that person doesnt immediately start bleeding to death.

I remember a university brochure (for my local uni) once said "your years at university will be the best years of your life". My uni years were rather uneventful so that would be a really depressing thought.

Breakfast before work/school. The mother always has a shit ton of food cooked and on the table while the father sits and drinks his coffee and reads his newspaper. The kids are always like "no time to eat! Gotta go!" STOP WASTING SO MUCH FUCKING FOOD!

Rape and violence against women were part of daily life in the olden days, but all the women still wear perfect makeup, have their eyebrows perfectly plucked, no underarm/leg hair, etc. Similarly, the apocalypse.

Also the idea that the automatic state of things when society fails is violence and anarchy.

Not a movie, but "13 Reasons Why" definitely normalized and romanticized suicide, and targeted teens. To be fair I have not, and will not watch the show, but I did read the book and wrote a whole paper in my Communications class freshman year of high school on why the book was not only bad for the age group, but also made suicide "ok", even though I know it's goal was to just start a suicide awareness conversation. But damn. Missed the mark.

How about parents loving their kids more than their partners? Sorry, but to be a good parent, you should love your wife or husband just as much, if not more than your child. If nothing else, to show the kid how to have a good relationship, and also to provide stability.

Women kicking men in the balls for minor offenses (or women hitting men for minor offenses in general). It's a serious thing and could ruin their ability to have kids and women start thinking violence is an acceptable way to deal with men.

And underage drinking. Literally every teen movie shows them drinking although there are no consequences whatsoever to lowering ones impulse control when your brain impulse control centers are already underdeveloped. So stupid.

It sets people up for disappointment but also normalizes toxic behavior - when someone crosses a line, you set a boundary, and then they do this big wonderful thing to win you over.

It’s creepy in real life and very manipulative.

I’m studying to be a therapist and currently working with several clients who are learning about healthy relationships, boundaries, and distress tolerance. Much of what they think they know about relationships is from TV and movies, and it’s really contributed to a lot of their relationship anxiety and confusion.

The firm establishment of right and wrong or good and evil. Right and wrong are more relative to situations, but superhero movies like to have absolute good, looking at you DC. Also, that hero movies basically have an ex machina to solve Earth's problems, why do we need a super powered being to save us, let's work on our own problems

The idea that all cheerleaders are witches, and nerds can't be attractive or popular. Also that curly hair and glasses are ugly (the nerd that gets the makeover really just straightens her hair and wears contacts).

That being into BDSM/sadism ect makes you a serial killer or a freak or a psychopath or something Criminal Minds does it a lot and I get the storyline behind it sort of but enjoying whipping someone who also enjoys being whipped doesn't mean they're gonna go kill a bunch of people and gouge their victims eyes out

Someone must have already said this, but just in case: the God-awful trope that a woman is a prize that will be awarded to you if you persevere. Filmmakers, please stop this. If a woman isn't interested, stalking her and harassing her isn't going to make her change her mind.

The stalker thing has already been mentioned. So I'll mention it's cousin: That a woman doesn't really know what she wants and needs in a relationship. So it is absolutely right to try to ruin her relationship with the man she's engaged to. And also, she really loves you, she just doesn't know it!

Here's looking at you, Sci-Fi! If it wasn't for Michael Burnham, I'd be stuck with Guinan (the Magical Negro/Supportive Black Woman) and Uhura (the Vulnerable Eye Candy Token). I love and respect both characters, but, come on, can't black women catch a break? We have emotions and desires like anyone else. We want to save the world. We're curious about the nature of Existence. We also need healthy representatives in media.

Let me rewind that: Women of Color Should Be Represented in the Future

Firefly is the one television series that got it right, imo, up til recent times. Gina Torres' character, Zoe, is a very balanced woman and woman of color character. She's both strong and loving, well-rounded and multi-dimensional. B'Elanna Torres of Star Trek Voyager is also a great depiction. The writers allowed her to display a reasonable, very human range of emotions. I love that the Star Trek franchise continues to evolve and at least tries, despite many cries of indignation, to diversify its characters and their experiences.

Men doing awful things without the women's consent (looking at you, office Christmas party van scene), the women screaming No! Stop! Out of their mind in fear. Next scene woman is totes kewl, not upset with the guy at all, and starts a relationship with him!

Sexual assault and rape of men. Multiple movies (wedding crashers, 40 days and 40 nights) have scenes where men are raped, and somehow it’s all just some big joke? In 40 days and 40 nights he’s even in trouble with his girlfriend and has to apologize? If these scenes featured women there would be absolute uproar.

Gender roles in general are SO pervasive in movies and I honestly think it’s making them more ingrained. The lazy husband who works and watches football while his wife juggles a million tasks is on every sitcom

In kids movies the girls rarely have supirior power or status, the boys are there to fill the adventure in and the girls are just in the background making cliche bimbo remarks about clothes and hair. They got a lot better about it but there are still some movies out there where the girl in the group is just there for decoration.

Everyone with a mental illness self-harms, or tries to attempt suicide, and then it’s “foiled” at the last second by unsuspecting and concerned mom/friend/love interest/whoever who yeets the bottle of pills across the bathroom and cries about how much they care.

Well, this is an opinion, and I could get so much hate for this, but I think that "the drive for human beings to survive and keep spreading no matter what" is kind of bad. I feel like humans just, aren't the best species to be prospering and maybe even someday spreading to new planets. We have brought way too much destruction to our own planet and our own species (I realize we can do quite a lot of good too, though!) and I think we need to step back and fix a lot about our species first before multiplying more.

I'm really shocked that I've gotten upvotes, and that people agree! I don't HATE the human species! I think we're capable of a lot of good, and a lot of love, when people use their brains more and work together on things. I've just seen way too much that's made me wish that we'd slow down and quit mindlessly popping out children and developing more and more land and just kind of...work on shit first.

So freaking true! I feel the same and people always raise their eyebrows when I tell them my opinion. It could really help our planet and our society in general and if you want kids that much adopt first, maybe even foster kids in the foster care system. I'm just happy that I too aren't alone with this opinion!

The apartments are always amazing lofts with wonderful little cafes or bars underneath. Houses are always adorable with white picket fences, even when the person apparently has zero money.

Outfits are always impeccable, perfectly stylish and awesome... no matter the occasion they always have a perfect dress, a perfect pair of jeans and amazing shoes to match. Also all perfectly tailored.

Bedrooms always have the perfect matching furniture, with the perfect bedspread and it all looks like they have a live-in interior designer. Perfectly organized closets.

Hair and makeup are always on point. Pretty sure Kerry Washington (Scandal) went at least 4 seasons before you ever saw her natural afro-hair... even first thing in the morning! And not a single time do you see her spending hours getting blowouts or treatments or anything.

Almost always displaying fresh fruit and flowers. Fridges are either empty, or totally filled with fresh, edible food and perfectly matching tupperware.

Oh god so many things. I'd add to the enormous list that's already here that

More often than not I find it's pretty common for women to only be portrayed as interesting and rounded when something awful has happened to them that they've had to move on from. For years as a teenager I thought I was uninteresting because I hadn't "experienced life yet" and then was abused by a boyfriend. I would give my left tit to not experience life.

Also that certain types of people are hot. People are attractive for so many reasons. Why does it have to be a very narrow margin for the lead woman to be considered attractive.

Older women (40+) don't exist. I'm not saying women that age are old but fuck me do they not appear on TV. Or any kind of media. Give me a group of 40-90year olds navigating life as the lead characters because I'm bored of young people...

Also that your teenage years are the best in your life. So far my 20s are going far better. I think that it's just going to improve from there.

The myth that women don't like sex/won't initiate. It's so annoying and such a shitty generalization. I love having sex with my husband, and I'm the one to initiate 8/10 times! WOMEN ALSO ENJOY SEX. We don't just have it with you to shut you up.

I work in early childhood education, and I have a huge problem with the pervasiveness of young kids watching superhero movies. Even alot of the stuff targeted at kids. Young kids (like, 6 and under) do not have enough grasp on the difference between movies and reality, and it's super confusing for them.

The "good guys" are just as violent as the "bad guys", and hurting people and destroying things is portrayed as acceptable as long as you're doing it to the "bad guys".

At an age when kids are just figuring out emotional regulation and social skills, we're teaching them that violence is a method that good people use to solve their problems.

That teenagers should look like the 20+ year old actors/actresses that play them. Blake Lively was 20 years old when Gossip Girl began and James Van Der Beek was 22 when Dawson's Creek started. Even if you watch on mute the images themselves push unhealthy and unrealistic body standards for all teenagers.

"Manic Pixie Dream Girls" The first word should be a dead giveaway. The charming quirks that catch the main character's attention are usually signs of emotional instability: She's spontaneous! She doesn't care what other people think! She's so free! She doesn't let anything get in her way! Too many tv shows, movies, and songs lionize mental illness (Sweet but Psycho). Someone in a Manic state can be very passionate and spontaneous while they make extremely poor decisions about their bodies, finances, families.

women after 40-50 that look like teen (just have thinner skin) but still have a wonderfull skin, thick hair, is thin with white teeth (only possible if it's your third teeth at this age) idk but in the same time, i hope that when i reach 40-50 i'll do something more interesting than taking hours everyday to look like somebody i'm not anymore...

The plot device where a character won't tell another character crucial information for no good reason and that's the plot of the whole hilarious misunderstanding. When I reality, they could have (probably would have) just had a mildly uncomfortable conversation and fixed everything, but NOOOOOO we CAN'T tell them..... 🙄

Eating disorders. It's kind of shocking how normal it is for girls in movies to joke about not eating anything, or going on a crazy diet for weeks to ''fit into a dress'' for a wedding or a party. To comment on being '''so bad'' after having a normal meal. Even in shows where they do adress the eating disorder, they do it so hastily and the characters seem to ''get over it'' in two minutes (looking at you Glee), because appearently hearing some motivational speech about how they're actually very beautiful, is enough to replace months/years of therapy.
I've struggled with an eating disorder for a long time, but it took me so long to see that it was actually a disorder. I just thought punishing yourself and starving yourself was normal behaviour.

The idea that men are born strong but women have to have some tragic thing occur to them to make them strong. Arya from GOT, Valkaryie from Thor. We've progressed past the dead parents trope for most male heroes these days. Why can't women just be strong for the sake of being strong?

The bigger issue is that people often lack the ability to differentiate a fictional movie/TV show with real life, therefore not realising that something they see on screen is over exaggerated for dramatic reasons but wouldn't be appropriate in the real world

That a woman can "fix" a broken man.
Women are not rehabilitation centers, and I want a partner, not another fucking job.

Oh! And if you just stay the course, take all the shit dumped on you, and continue pouring endless amount of love into someone, eventually they will open their eyes and see the one they have been waiting for has been there the whole time.

The idea of the lone wolf (usually) male protagonist who saves the world all on his very own because he doesn't need anyone. Reinforces the idea that "real men" shouldn't ask for help and the typically masculine centric ideas of power and strength alienate girls from the role.

Already commented but here’s another, possibly even more controversial one-

Unnecessary Lesbianism catering to the male gaze but presented under the guise of progressivism to avoid being called out for misogyny. They are EVERYWHERE. LGBTQ+ needs more screen time, yes. But where is the love? Cuz most of what I’m seeing in the mainstream is lust. PLUS. Many times when there’s a ‘badass’ type woman, especially if she’s the lead, the movie will hint (or more) at the possibility of her being gay. Again, I have nothing against being gay. But why is it that a woman who likes dick, especially dick exclusively, is hard to accept as an action hero? How does ‘liking dick’ = submissive in all aspects of life? When the damsel in distress trope is ‘reversed,’ why is it so often that the one in distress is STILL a woman? Do men not realize that many among them are, in fact, not burly and macho? Some dudes are weak or lazy or small. And even if they ARE the superman type, why is the idea of needing to be saved, or not being the most impressive member of the group, so insulting to them, whereas women are expected to just accept that role as ‘naturally’ ours? I’m taller than some of my male friends. Stronger than some of them, too. But if I were an action lead, audiences would still complain that my strength is ‘unrealistic.’ I think people judge sex and gender according to what movies tell them is real before they even consider what they’re ACTUALLY seeing in real life.

Absolutely stunningly beautiful women being portrayed as the "ugly duckling".
In what world can Emma Stone not find a date?!

I don't know how they would fix this, as it's also not a positive message to use a woman who isnt as attractive - especially if they then give her a makeover in the film - but maybe use an average woman and promote her as attractive for her personality and normal looks? Don't give her a make over. Make her a winning woman.

I wonder if that would actually sell though? As people like to look at 'typically beautiful' actresses.

Explaining things to kids that they're too young to understand. TV and movies aimed at adults often write child characters as far more worldly wise and understanding than they actually are, capable of being their parent's sidekick and confidant.

Being unhappy. I hear it way too often that people are just crazy unhappy. Not depression, just really unhappy about their job, life, friends, and so on... but at the same time, people tell them "that's life, you'll always be unhappy about something."

It's so depressing and sad just telling people to give up and accept the circumstance.

Pretty people are always stupid and/or have a bad personality while [less conventionally pretty] people are always really good on the inside. This is also true if you substitute the idea of 'successful' vs. 'unsuccessful.'

This. Many people don't realize the forced Christianity in many shows and movies, simply because of how used to it as a culture we are (speaking as an American, here). Christians are portayed as "the norm" whereas other religions are sidelined or downright disrespected, and were often used as comedic relief.

(While I'm here, I might as well add that idgaf if you're Christian or not, this post was not an attack on Christianity, and if you are (somehow?) offended, I highly recommend you do some research on how minorities have been treated in Hollywood the past ~100 years, and the evolution of religious portrayal in the media at least since the 50's til to today.)

That’s because that’s how witches have always been portrayed historically. Western culture is inherently Christian at its roots, whether you like it or not. It’s not Hollywood pushing that narrative, it’s cultural.

Besides, witchcraft is a bad example, that perception is ubiquitous across time and space throughout recorded history.

No. Witchcraft has not always been viewed as other or weird. You are viewing it through your cultural lens. Witchcraft or the belief in magical skills and rituals particularly those relating to natural world was once the mainstream culture and still is in some cultures.

If you have any questions about this moderation action, please message the moderators through the link on the sidebar or here. If you are messaging about your removed comment or post, please include a link to the removed content for review.

Disrespecting consent. Guys being weird stalkers, kissing women without permission, and trying to erase years of unhealthy relationship by doing some big romantic gesture are portrayed as cute, romantic guys the audience is supposed to have empathy for.

Hooking up at a party while the girl is super trashed, like might not know what's going on.
As a teenager I didn't know that this was soooo wrong and after having experienced losing my virginity this way, I now realize the impact this trope had on me. Not enjoyable at all and if I was in a coherent state I would most certainly have declined. There's a huge difference between shit faced and easily coerced, and having one drink to make you less worried about making a move, that you already wanted to do while sober.

I would say getting punched in the face. In the movies, a person gets knocked out and they are okay. They might lose a couple of teeth or bleed, but they're fine an hour later. IRL, people can sustain life-altering brain injuries pretty easily from a hard punch in the face... or falling from a punch and hitting their head.

I hate how movies portray every adolescent boy as a sociopathic sexual predator. Looking up girls skirts, watching their neighbor undress through binoculars. First off, not all 13 year old boys are like that and those acts are playful boy stuff - that is absolute sexual predation that could lead to charges.

Wedding Crashers, Horrible Bosses, and Norbit to name a few. Most of the movies are comedies so it's played for laughs but if the roles were reversed it would really hard to sell it as comedic. For real life examples, the show COPS did this too. When they were called onto scenes of domestic disputes and if the abuser was cleary the lady, the cops would still talk down to the guy as if he were ineffectual, stupid, and would blame him even if they were the only ones bloody and beat up with the woman being perfectly fine.

The drug lords (capos) and their ""romantic"" life with one women but at the same time having a dozens of lovers and people are really. Starting to believe that drug lords have nice feelings for the love of his life therefore, their jail sentence should be reduce

I think part of the problem when people talk about issues in respecting Boundries and how x person controlled x person in a story and really shouldn’t have been shown.

Sadly, as Esther perel has shown, all the things that make for a healthy stable relationship kill erotic desire and vice versa.

It’s a journey and a learning path to figure out how to bring erotic desire into a stable healthy relationship.

Things like possession and other elements often are erotic in many ways. (In right context of course) and so they get shown in these stories because while cognitivley we may not want it, when we are present in front of the screen we love it in an emotionally present way as it brings us alive.

The sudden need to remind how Ted Bundy was a crazy mass murderer but "dreamy" in the eyes of some..yes, let's revisit every heinous act he committed against women and continue to spread craziness into the world. Way to go